I have covered this subject for some time and will reference some earlier blogs in this one. As two of Japan’s 50 currently stopped reactors will be restarted shortly, it may make sense to write an overview to put this matter into perspective. Before the four reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi (by the way, "daiichi” means number 1; number 2 is nearby) nuclear plant got destroyed, there were 54 reactors in Japan. The US has 104 reactors, and Japan has more than half that number in its tiny territory (one twenty-sixth that of the US).

After the enormous jolt, all four of the Fukushima Daiichi reactors were automatically shut down but were standing without major damage to the cores. Hitting all the coastal areas near the epicenter, the tsunami reached the plant shortly after the earthquake. The tsunami did some damage to the compound and surrounding areas but did not critically damage the reactors. However, seawater flooded backup generators that were housed underground. The decision to house them underground copied US emergency measures for avoiding damage from tornadoes. Backup power is necessary, when power from the grid is lost, to cool fuel rods because they get very hot even when reactors are not in operation. The lack of backup led to hydrogen explosions and the rest is history.

At the time of the crisis, TEPCO (the utilities company serving Tokyo and surrounding areas) and the government did not communicate well, and chaos ruled the entire country. Rumors of radiation reaching Tokyo made people very nervous. On top of that, rolling blackouts were conducted to save the collapse of the entire grid, handicapping train service and stranding millions of people. Adding insult to injury, aftershocks of various scales were felt very often during that time, making people sleepless and scared.

Now it is revealed that the Japanese government and the US forces in Japan had accurate information on radiation cloud flow at the time. However, that information was not shared with people close to the damaged reactors. Some people were evacuated along the very route of the radiation cloud flow and received some dose of radiation. One thing I was surprised by was that there were no clear emergency evacuation guidelines about which agency of the government should do what or who should evacuate. In the US, NRC has clear guidelines and plans for emergency evacuation. For example, the 5-mile radius is considered within direct threat of radiation, and 50 miles is considered the possible reach of indirect contamination via food and drink.

Many Japanese people felt that foreigners, including Americans, overreacted and became hysterical, exaggerating the disaster as if the entire country were destroyed or blanketed with radiation. The US embassy in Tokyo issued an advisory to US citizens in Japan to evacuate beyond the 50-mile radius of the damaged reactors. The embassy simply followed the NRC guidelines and also had more accurate data about radiation than the average Japanese population. Yes, there were some overreactions on the part of non-Japanese, but the Japanese government did not release pertinent information in time, much less in other languages, making those people worried about the worst.

During the following dozen months, antinuke sentiment was in full bloom, and everyone (Japanese and people outside of Japan) believed Japan would abandon nuclear power. Any other opinions were shut out because it was the right thing to do. But how did that change and why is Japan restarting some reactors? Time is usually a healer and also contributes to fading bad memories. People started to forget how bad it was. However, a power shortage was on everyone's mind. See my earlier postings on this.

• Power Shortage in Tokyo: Firsthand Experience, Part 1 (July 11, 2012)

• Power Shortage in Tokyo: Firsthand Experience, Part 2 (July 13, 2012)

• Power Shortage in Tokyo: Firsthand Experience, Part 3 -- Very Confused State of Energy Policies in Japan (July 15, 2011)

• Power Shortage in Tokyo: Firsthand Experience, Part 4 and Final (July 21, 2011)

• Load Shifting to Combat the Power Shortage in Tokyo (August 01, 2011 )

• Japan Ends Mandatory Power Conservation (September 09, 2011 )

• What Will Tokyo Do with Its Power Supply as Winter Approaches? (November 11, 2011 )

• How Is the Power Supply in Japan These Days? (December 06, 2011 )

• Does Japan Have the Power to Cope with Summer? (February 29, 2012)

• Japan under Power Crunch (March 14, 2012)

Prime Minister (PM) Kan, who was in office at the time of the disaster, was adamant about getting rid of nuclear plants and promoting renewable energies instead. He was very unpopular for other reasons and tried to use this slogan to survive a no-confidence vote. He delayed restarting all the reactors that were halted for annual checkups by introducing a new requirement as a condition for a restart. While this was going on, operational reactors were not stopped for this new requirement. Finally, he made a deal to step down in exchange for passing a feed-in-tariff that was subsequently passed and will be in effect on July 1.

His successor is PM Noda, who has not made his position clear on what to do with the disabled reactors and other reactors. One by one, reactors were shut down for their annual checkup. But none of them were restarted even after the successful checkup. And at the end of April this year, all the reactors were shut down and there were no reactors in operation to supply power to the grid.

However, towards his first anniversary in office, PM Noda made a move. He may have been motivated by the coming summer power crunch, expected especially in the Kansai area (Osaka, Kobe, Kyoto, and Nara). Their reliance on nuclear power was close to 50%, and none of the reactors were in operation. Long story short, he abruptly formed a committee to decide security and safety measures for nuclear reactor operation. Even though it had been more than a year, nothing had been done up to that point. Surprisingly, his committee came up with the measures in a matter of a few days. The security and safety measures were not shared with the general public, and I am not sure if experts in the field contributed to them. The measures were approved, and the stage has been set to restart two (at the Ooi plant) of the halted reactors in the Kansai area.

Governors and mayors close to the Ooi plant opposed restarting the reactors without well-thought-out safety and security measures. But in the end, they were forced to accept the restart. With no more formidable opposition, the government gave the go-ahead to KEPCO, which serves the Kansai area. The restart of the two reactors is imminent.

This oversimplified journal gives you the story on what has happened in the pursuit of restarting nuclear reactors in Japan since the quake. I am not against the restart of the reactors as long as real safety and security measures are discussed with scientists but not by politicians. My prediction is that a good number of the remaining 48 reactors will be restarted soon. There is no longer a barrier to restarting them.

The year's election in California includes a referendum to halt two nuclear power plants in the state until permanent nuclear fuel process plants are built. After Japan's disaster, public sentiment in the US moved against nuclear power. But as time goes by, people forget. The US and other countries are building more nuclear power plants. See A US Nuclear Power Renaissance? (February 12, 2012).

Interested readers may want to refer to my blogs on Japan's nuclear power:

◦ Is Japan Really Getting Out of Nukes? (January 20, 2012)

◦ What’s Next with Japan's Nuclear Power? (March 25, 2012)

◦ Should Japan Restart Any of Its Nuclear Reactors? (April 09, 2012 )

◦ More on Japan's Nuclear Reactors (April 25, 2012)

◦ How to Fight Peak Power Demand in Japan (May 15, 2012)

◦ Japan Restarts Two Nuclear Reactors (May 31, 2012)